《联合国海洋法公约》争端解决机制具有整体上的强制性。《公约》构建了司法管辖、仲裁管辖和辅助管辖等多元异质性强制管辖，架构了前置程序、识别程序、初步程序和审裁程序等多重次序性强制程序。针对菲律宾就中菲南海争端单方强推的国际仲裁，我们可以立足于争端强制解决机制的多元异质性与多重次序性，让《公约》机制为我所用，为中国所持的“双不”立场提供清晰的国际法注解，寻求中国主权维护之策，并为日后类似侵蚀中国主权的行为提供预防性立场注解，以赢得国际社会的理解和支持。我们应利用初步程序，坚持前置程序理据，对仲裁法庭受案提出反对主张,利用对事管辖和时间效力阐明仲裁法庭无管辖权的法理所在,利用裁决属性搁置可能的不利裁决，以维护国家主权。

The dispute settlement mechanism of The United Nations Convention on the law of the sea is mandatory on the whole. The Convention establishes a sort of multiple heterogeneous mandatory jurisdictions, including judiciary jurisdiction, arbitration jurisdiction and auxiliary jurisdiction, and frames a kind of multiple mandatory processes in sequence, including pre-procedure, identification procedure, preliminary procedure and adjudication procedure. Facing Philippines’ strong push of the international arbitration unilaterally concerning Sino-Philippine South China Sea disputes, we can base ourselves on the multiple heterogeneous and sequential attributes of the Convention’s Mandatory Dispute Settlement Mechanism and let it serve us to make a clear justification for China’s “Double No” position and seek for the strategy and plan to maintain China’s sovereignty from the perspective of international law and thus provide a precautionary justification for China’s future position to the similar erosions to China’s sovereignty to win the support and understanding of the international community on China’s positions. We should use the preliminary procedure and adhere to the pre-procedure to make our objective stance to the arbitral tribunal’s acceptance of the case, use the rationae materiae and the issue of validity in time to explain why we assert that the arbitral tribunal has no jurisdiction to the case and use its award’s attribute to set aside the possible adverse ruling to maintain the state sovereignty.